Question for the Developers?

[Arryn]

Peter,

I am loathe to debate the relative merits of another game's AI in a Dom forum but I feel compelled to point out why I consider the Paradox AI (which is pretty much the same in all games based on the EU engine) to be so stupid. The key factor is not in what the AI attacks, though even in that regard the Dom AI is far superior (and I've been playing with it for six weeks at 12-18 hours per day, every day). The true measure of an AI is in how well it defends. In this, the Paradox AI is one of the worst I have seen. And what makes it particularly annoying to me is that the user community has been pointing out the flaws for 2+ years and they continue to release new games that have bugs that were reported 2 years and 3 different games earlier. Paradox doesn't have the excuse that IW has in developing a game in their spare time while working on other jobs to feed their families. Despite this handicap, IW has created one of the best AIs in the genre. Paradox is either incompetent at this aspect of game design or doesn't care.

BTW, pointing out that the EU engine is realtime is meaningless as the AI can take as long as it wants per country. I play on a 2.1GHz system, but I have also played their games on a 350MHz (which is just above their minimum spec, FYI) and the game just slows down. It doesn't play "dumber" because it has insufficient time to do the same amount of calculations. Hence the flaw in your argument.

[Peter Ebbesen]

Originally posted by Arryn:

BTW, pointing out that the EU engine is realtime is meaningless as the AI can take as long as it wants per country. I play on a 2.1GHz system, but I have also played their games on a 350MHz (which is just above their minimum spec, FYI) and the game just slows down. It doesn't play "dumber" because it has insufficient time to do the same amount of calculations. Hence the flaw in your argument.

What flaw in my argument? I just point out that if you can allocate 30s pure processor time on a fast computer, and correspondingly more on a slow computer, because timing is not important, to calculate a turn result while only displaying a minimal popup and accepting minimal user interaction, you have substantially more CPU cycles to make decisions, simulate battles, &etc, than a game that needs to time-slice such decisions in real-time for a large number of factions while, at the same time, running the graphics engine and the GUI, which keeps a fairly steady flow on most machines.

That is not fundamentally a question of machine speed, it is a question of CPU allocation - and one of the reasons that comparisons between real-time and turn-based are often wont to fail.

[ February 18, 2004, 00:28: Message edited by: Peter Ebbesen ]

[moodgiesanta]

EU2 is a lot harder when you play as a single province nation with strong neighbors, preferably a vassal of someone too. And a lot more fun. Although I always was ticked off when my friendly neighbors would have 50 troops in one province and, adjacently, rebels in one next to my newly conquered highly rebellious province, and then them letting the rebels take over before reacting and the rebels pouring over the border. But it was a good game, nonetheless, nay, a great game.

[Pirateiam]

It amazes me that so many people think this is the way to make money. Large publishers don't pay great royalties. I designed and developed 5 games at retail with large publishers. Space Empires IV has earned the developer more in royalties than I made off 5 games through large publishers. Dominions II is on that same track. That is why I started Shrapnel Games - so developers could make money.

Remember that a big publisher also typically means an even smaller share per sold unit to the developers. Unless you can count on massively increased sales, going to a big publisher can actually end up costing you money despite increased market penetration. Oh so true. The truth is, to get Dominions II the numbers at retail to make even the kind of money we pay would require the game being 'dumbed down' - it's 'too' much of a strategy game.

Depends on whether the publisher is willing (unlikely as that is) to front the devs some money to improve their product(s) and/or to develop new products.

Most definitely they would. This is how they make sure they own the code and don't have to pay large royalties. Of course they would ask for less depth too.

Tim,

I do not think they need a big publisher (In fact I think your business model has great merit and have been watching and holding my breath that it will be succesful) but they do need development help (cash)to reach a larger market....but maybe the sad truth is that it would have to be "dumbed down" for a larger market. Since this is your business and you would know if anyone does is there larger market for games like this? Please please tell me that there is so I do not have nightmares of SIMs XXIV Miami Vice edition. Please tell me there is a future for intelligent strategy games so I can enjoy my hobby when I retire lol. It just seems that the pick lists for good strategy games gets smaller and smaller and if I see one more RTS (1.) gather wood, food and Iron 2.) Build big army 3.) click on enemy and send big army....wow strategy! ) I am going to S#$T!

By the way I think I played many of the games you developed. You wrote the code for Soldiers at War right? I still have that game today...hmmm I wonder if it will run on XP?? I really do hope that you are succesful and there is a future for this market and not just a bunch of old men trying to keep our hobby alive. Just wondering do you see young people (18-25) buying your games or are you just serving an established older market?

[ February 18, 2004, 03:41: Message edited by: Pirateiam ]

[Tim Brooks]

Since this is your business and you would know if anyone does is there larger market for games like this?

Not with this level of difficulty. But you must define 'larger market'. If you are comparing this to what a really awesome FPS would do at retail, well there is no comparison. A good turn based strategy game would be considered successful with 35,000 units at full retail (in other words not discounted for the bargain bins or put out at $9.00 in a Jewel Case). An FPS could do 10 to 20 times that amount. And that is what a big publisher is looking for -those numbers in the 6 figures, not a 'measly' 35,000 units. And the reality is much worse with the 'average' game at retail selling under 5,000 units (and that counts in the 6 figure FPSs).

...and if I see one more RTS (1.) gather wood, food and Iron 2.) Build big army 3.) click on enemy and send big army....wow strategy! ) ...

But that is exactly what a large publisher wants in a 'strategy' title.

You wrote the code for Soldiers at War right?

Not that one. I was just hired to do the original design. What it ended up being was quite different than I had envisioned.

Just wondering do you see young people (18-25) buying your games or are you just serving an established older market?

Yes younger people buy our games, but not in huge numbers. I think that a gamer has to mature past the twitch addiction and start wanting to slow things down a little and think and that usually doesn't happen until most of the Console Generation reaches their 30's.

You know we have been in business now for almost 5 years. We are doing well. Our biggest drawback (other than the economy as a whole) is that there just aren't that many good strategy / wargames out there. We turn down alot that doesn't meet our criteria of being a 'game'.

[ February 18, 2004, 22:40: Message edited by: Tim Brooks ]

[Graeme Dice]

Originally posted by Tim Brooks:
Yes younger people buy our games, but not in huge numbers. I think that a gamer has to mature past the twitch addiction and start wanting to slow things down a little and think and that usually doesn't happen until most of the Console Generation reaches their 30's.

Heh. I've been playing what my brother calls "stare at the dot games" (VGA Planets) since I was 14.

[Zarimax]

I've bought 3 games from Shrapnel and I have their Lock 'N Load bumper sticker on my computer case. It is the best publisher that I've ever dealt with as a customer.

Every time I buy a game from Shrapnel, I get a warm, squishy feeling because I'm helping to affirm to the world that games don't need to be on store shelves to be amazing.

Bigger publishers just are not worth it. That's the message that I'm sure the Dom2 developers already know.

[Gandalf Parker]

Thus is the need for truisms like granny used to use such as "better to be a big fish in a small pond than to be a small fish in a big pond". While everyones attention is in getting their piece of the big pond, there is room for someone who can work the small pond and do it well.

Yes the "strategy over pretty" might be a smaller group but I feel that Illwinter can grab more of that group then they could if they tried to pretty-up the game for the bigger group. Eventually that might be possible but not if they rush it. Rushing into that market would at best, make them average.

If the winnings were equal, or even slightly better, there is still something to be said for doing it your own way and with pride rather than selling for the masses. I get the impression that Illwinter made that choice long ago.
Just my humble opinion.

[Pirateiam]

Tim thanks for answering my questions. Lets just hope that us big fish can keep this little pond full of good clean water. My Last 4 purchases have been from Shrapnel games, Battlefront and Matrix and I plan on supporting these independant small publishers fron now on. I just hope that Illwinter sells enough units so they can quit thier day jobs and do this fulltime!

[CharonJr]

I am afraid that there actually isn't a much bigger market for games like these.

The people who are interested in strategy games which are weighting in on the "deeper" side tend to know where to look for them (Shrapnel, Matrix and Battlefront come to my mind here) or at least know some forums were to look.

I think the little polls on these forums tell quite a lot about the people who are playing games like these (25+/male - no big surprise there).

Let's face it, we are a minority in times were instant gratification is the epitome of gaming.

CharonJr